Jump to content


Cabot/Mortimer Court Claim - old Aqua CC


Recommended Posts

I like the one that andyorch did here..

 

 

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So this is good to submit?

 

thank you

 

1.By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua & the Defendant on or around 21/03/2014 (the Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue the defendant with a credit card.

 

2.The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due.

 

3.The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice.

 

4.The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant. The Claimant therefore claims £2539.88 and costs.

 

 

defence

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with New Day Ltd RE Aqua. I do not recall the precise details of the agreement and have sought clarity from the claimant.

 

2. I do not recall ever receiving a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974.

 

3. I do not recall ever receiving this notice pursuant to sec136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

4. On receipt of this claim I sent CPR 31.14 and section 78 request. The claimant did partially comply but failed to provide a valid copy of the agreement and therefore remains in default of said request.

 

5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-

 

a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement ; and

b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

c) Show or evidence service of a Default Notice/Notice of Sums in Arrears,

d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

add after 

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.
 

add at start of your 2.

2. paragraph 3 is noted: 

 

same for 3 re their para 4.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you add in the bits?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As advised.

 

I can’t thank you enough.

 

1.By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua & the Defendant on or around 21/03/2014 (the Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue the defendant with a credit card.

 

2.The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due.

 

3.The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice.

 

4.The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant. The Claimant therefore claims £2539.88 and costs.

 

 

defence

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) - Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.

 

1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with New Day Ltd RE Aqua. I do not recall the precise details of the agreement and have sought clarity from the claimant.

 

2. Paragraph 3 is noted, however, I do not recall ever receiving a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974.

 

3. Paragraph 4 is noted, however I do not recall ever receiving this notice pursuant to sec136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

4. On receipt of this claim I sent CPR 31.14 and section 78 request. The claimant did partially comply but failed to provide a valid copy of the agreement and therefore remains in default of said request.

 

5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-

 

a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement ; and

b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

c) Show or evidence service of a Default Notice/Notice of Sums in Arrears,

d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you should get notice soon that they have 28 days ish to do something.

if they don't it gets autostayed.

if it does move forward that will be an N180 from the court.

 

now get reading up on whats to come throughout the process should it go all the way.

 

plenty of claimforn card 

threads here to read

particularly in our legal successes forum for this one.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Morning.

 

Had no response to any info request at all, other than a letter saying information had been requested as it wasn’t currently held. Given that 28 days have passed, next step is to approach the court, I believe? Or should I be allowing some extra time for any post to arrive, given COVID?

 

MCOL still shows we are at the defence stage in the recent transactions box.

 

Thank you for your advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not been reading up then?

 

as per my last post..the claim is now stayed

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve read some other threads, rather my understanding of some of the language is not tremendously good.

 

Thank you for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the court should have written to you acknowledging your defence filing?

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...